Population of these United States is 310,000,000
Population that is 15 years old or under 60,000,000
Population that is over 68 years old 35,000,000
___________________________________________
Potential Working age population is 215,000,000
From them, subtract the following.
Population that is in prison is 2,300,000
Population that is in military 1,400,000 (Army Navy Air Force Marines)
Disabled working age population 1,300,000 (That is a generous estimate.)
_______________________________________
Available workforce 210,000,000

People employed full time 137,000,000 (from the nefarious DOL and probably an overstatement for effect)

People unemployed or under-employed in the working population 73,000,000 (210 M minus 137 M)

73 M divided by 210 M times 100 for the percentage. (34%) Oh No!

Thus 34% of the working population is unemployed or underemployed.

Even if you were to say that 40 million were college students or seniors in high school or full time housewives or househusbands, you will still have 33 million unemployed.

Colleges conducting their own surveys keep coming up with this 33 million number of people who would be working if only they could find a real job. Many of them are working part time jobs, but you can not support a family on a part time job.

Somehow, I just do not trust the government numbers, especially when they say that less than half of the population is in the workforce. 153 Million versus 310 Million.

You are forgetting that the labor force calculation traditionally ignores stay-at-home parents.

Click to expand...

Oh my gosh, you have morphed into Pinko. He always makes up stuff that he says I have said or not included in my presentation and then criticises the reality of the horrible economy as being the fault of people who do not understand that the government statistics are god.

If you read my post, you will see that I did not "forget stay at home parents." I included them in the 40 million college students, house wives and house husbands. That was a very generous estimate at forty million. You should be ashamed at your response.

Pinko lies like that all of the time, every time he posts because he is a pathological liar. I will just assume that you did not read what I wrote before responding.

Actually for 3/4ths of the world, the women who work outside of the home are working in the fields trying to raise enough food to feed the family. I would guess that Mary was active in some communal farm work project.

Where I grew up in Mexico (way south of Puerto Vallarta 1958 - 1959) the community (communal village - ejido _ a form of simple communism) owned the farm land in common. All of the people shared in the work in that farmland. The wives and children also helped. I rode horses or mules out to the fields with my best friends at the age of 11 and 12 and helped hoe weeds from between the rows of corn and beans. I loved that simple life and return to that ejido with frequency. I am usually greeted there as if I was a native Mexican. Some of my childhood friends are still there. Their work was physically hard, but was not stressful.

The WSJ (maybe it was Heritage.org) had an interesting take. During the 2001 recession we actually experienced MORE job losses than during this recession. Yet the unemployment rate didnt go much above 5%. Why?
Because employers were still creating jobs in the recession, enough to almost offset the losses.
This time around employers are not creating jobs because of the political uncertainty. No one knows what it will cost to hire people or run a business. This adminstration is directly responsible for that, proposing vast new regulations and then leaving them up in the air.
All this will end after November when the GOP retakes Congress and stymies whatever is left of Obama's proposals.

The WSJ (maybe it was Heritage.org) had an interesting take. During the 2001 recession we actually experienced MORE job losses than during this recession. Yet the unemployment rate didnt go much above 5%. Why?
Because employers were still creating jobs in the recession, enough to almost offset the losses.
This time around employers are not creating jobs because of the political uncertainty. No one knows what it will cost to hire people or run a business. This adminstration is directly responsible for that, proposing vast new regulations and then leaving them up in the air.
All this will end after November when the GOP retakes Congress and stymies whatever is left of Obama's proposals.

Click to expand...

Actually Rebbi, according to surveys conducted by the University of California, the University of Chicago and the University of North Carolina, unemployment varies between 26 and 30 percent. I believe the 30 percent figure. We all know that the government is lying like hell about the present Depression. There are too many Hoovervilles to be denied.

Actually Rebbi, according to surveys conducted by the University of California, the University of Chicago and the University of North Carolina, unemployment varies between 26 and 30 percent. I believe the 30 percent figure. We all know that the government is lying like hell about the present Depression. There are too many Hoovervilles to be denied.

Click to expand...

I've never met anyone interviewed by these surveys, nor have I read any of the results, nor seen any link to any of these surveys. Therefore, by Neubarth's own arguments, I'm justified in saying they don't exist. I think I'm then supposed to go off on unrelated insults and calling him names and wishing violence on him as well.

Odd how he dismisses a survey that's been conducted by the Census since 1941 as non existant because he's never met anyone who's been interviewed, yet he expects people to take his guesses as the "real" rate. And accept his word abut the results of alleged surveys without anyone having the ability to see the actual results, methodology and what they're actually saying. The hypocrisy is amazing.

You are forgetting that the labor force calculation traditionally ignores stay-at-home parents.

Click to expand...

Oh my gosh, you have morphed into Pinko. He always makes up stuff that he says I have said or not included in my presentation and then criticises the reality of the horrible economy as being the fault of people who do not understand that the government statistics are god.

If you read my post, you will see that I did not "forget stay at home parents." I included them in the 40 million college students, house wives and house husbands. That was a very generous estimate at forty million. You should be ashamed at your response.

Pinko lies like that all of the time, every time he posts because he is a pathological liar. I will just assume that you did not read what I wrote before responding.

Click to expand...

Your headline, the 34% number, does not include stay-at-home parents. You mention them below, but yet do not subtract them from your headline number. This is no different than what the media does (cherry-pick numbers for effect).

I agree that the actual unemployment is much higher than the official numbers, but purposefully over-estimating for dramatic effect does us no good.

Useful Searches

About USMessageBoard.com

USMessageBoard.com was founded in 2003 with the intent of allowing all voices to be heard. With a wildly diverse community from all sides of the political spectrum, USMessageBoard.com continues to build on that tradition. We welcome everyone despite political and/or religious beliefs, and we continue to encourage the right to free speech.

Come on in and join the discussion. Thank you for stopping by USMessageBoard.com!